Alberta Pacific Pulp Mill WCWC File Photo
Toward Sustainable Development in the Canadian Pulp and Paper Industry
By Dr. David Schindler
As a member of both the National Round Table on pulp and paper and the science advisory committee of the Northern Rivers study in Alberta, I have been able to view first hand what's been happening to the pulp industry in Canada as well as in the province of Alberta. While there has been marvellous progress in some rather narrow areas, overall I see a recipe for disaster, if long-term, ecologically sustainable development is really the goal of Canadian society. I discuss some of the reasons below.
What is Sustainable Development?
It's obvious that these words mean different things to politicians, environmentalists and industrialists and there is no precise definition that can be agreed upon. However, most agree that the concept of sustainability means some sort of balance between economic prosperity, human social well being and maintaining the integrity of the environment. I've seen it commonly depicted as a triangle, with environment, economics and societal concerns at the three corners, to reflect equal concerns.
At present, pulp and paper is not produced in a sustainable way in Canada, nor, for that matter in the rest of the world.
I don't like this definition, for it does not recognize that our environment is a finite quantity, i.e. there are boundaries beyond which we cannot go to balance social or economic concerns no matter how important they are, unless we wish to jeopardise the survival of Homo Sapiens. However, the simple point that I want to make doesn't require any special definition. At present, pulp and paper is not produced in a sustainable way in Canada, or, for that matter in the rest of the world.
Sustainability in the Forestry and Pulp and Paper Sectors
Economic Concerns:
According to Price Waterhouse's 1992 Report "The Forest Industry in Canada", the Forest Industry in Canada lost 3.9 billion dollars in 1991 and 1992, well below it's $20 billion profit in 1990. The outlook for 1993 is reported to be similar to 1991 and 1992. Of this, wood pulp reported a loss of $835 million in 1991-92. At the November 1993 meeting of the Pulp and Paper Round Table at Thunder Bay, we were told by industry representatives that the prospects for 1993 were equally bleak. The problem, we were told, is that projected world demands have decreased, while supplies continue to increase, i.e. the market is saturated. Many industry fingers were pointed at Alberta, where we were told that unrealistically low stumpage fees give mills an unfair advantage of $20-45 dollars a tonne, jeopardizing eastern mills.
However, we were told that Alberta mills too were losing money... just less than in other areas. So much for economic prosperity.
Jobs are the centrepiece of every promotional scheme I've seen for building or expanding a pulp mill. Yet even before the ink is dry on the blueprints, the industry is busy figuring out how to eliminate jobs, replacing people with machines. Having toured several pulp mills in the past years, I've been struck by the scarcity of humans. Only a few souls to keep an eye on gauges, computers, etc. while machines do the rest. In 1990-92, the forest industry eliminated 62,600 jobs in Canada, some 28% of the direct workforce in 3 years! In the pulp and paper industry, jobs are declining at 20% per decade. Who picks up the support for the workforce that is no longer needed? Taxpayers of course.
Environmental ConcernsIndustry's record in the environmental area is much improved, but still far from where it needs to be for "sustainability" to be an appropriate term. Dioxins and furans in most mill effluents have decreased by 99% in 4 years. Despite industry claims that AOX is not an efficient regulatory parameter, this remarkable reduction was accomplished in order to meet more stringent regulations on AOX emissions. BOD and total dissolved solids outputs are also down. However, only 34 of 46 Canadian mills are in compliance with CEPA regulations. About 50% of the mills have had to request extensions to December 1995 to meet Fisheries Act Regulations. Also we are paying for cleaner effluents in another way: nutrient pollution, the same problem that caused us to regulate phosphates in detergents and municipal pollution 20 years ago.
In 1990-92, the forest industry eliminated 62.600 jobs in Canada, some 28% of the direct workforce in 3 years!
Efficient sewage systems are key ingredients in modern pulp mills. High bacterial action is necessary to make these systems work properly. The easiest way to do this is to add phosphorus and nitrogen fertilizer to the lagoons, for pulp mill for effluent is too low in these two elements for efficient bacterial action. However, effluents often contain 5mg/L of phosphorus, an unacceptably high amount. In Alberta, the pulp industry has attempted to counter the charge that their effluents could be causing excess algal growths in reaches below mills by publishing figures showing that industry contributes a small amount of the total phosphorus input to the river basin from all sources. This is true, if all types of phosphorus and all areas of the river are considered. But it is the particular reaches of the river below pulp mills that are of concern, not the whole length. Data clearly show that mills contribute greatly to the phosphorus supplies in such reaches, for phosphorus concentrations in the Athabasca River increase below mills. The concern is greatest at low summer flows. Moreover, much of the phosphorus released from mills is in forms that are highly available for plant growth. Studies by Environment Canada scientists below pulp mills in British Columbia have shown that increases in phosphorus of only 0.2ug/L, a nearly undetectable amount, causes excessive algal growths.
The impact will depend on whether or not suitable sites for attached algae occur in the reaches below mills.
Northern Rivers studies should resolve this point in Alberta. In general, I predict that regulation of phosphorus will be forthcoming in Canada, for water is becoming too scarce to allow even the potential for eutrophication.
Two other important riddles are being solved. For years, native people living along the Athabasca River have been complaining that the water tasted bad with a kind of mildewy smell and taste in winter. Scientists working on the Northern Rivers Study have shown that such smells come from the transformation under ice of organochlorine compounds emitted from bleached Kraft mills to other compounds that produce the tastes and odours. Such compounds were causing detectable problems 1200 km below where effluents were discharged!
Remember the flap last spring about the Environment Canada studies that were reported to show that bleached Kraft effluents were not toxic (when in fact the studies showed that all mill effluents were toxic)? Recent Environment Canada studies in the East show that toxicity appears to be due to a class of compounds known as plant sterols that have previously not been regulated. They may be natural compounds that are simply superconcentrated before discharging in the river. Details of these and other Northern Rivers studies were divulged at the public meeting of Northern Rivers, in January of this year.
Sustainability, Huh!
As is clearly the case in agriculture and fisheries, we can no longer plan forestry projects without considering what's happening to similar industries and markets globally.
The forest industry is Canada's largest. It roughly equals the mining, petrochemical and agricultural industries together in its contribution to the Canadian economy, contributing $22.9 Billion to foreign exchange earnings. In brief, we cannot do without it.
But looking down the road a generation or two, it will be equally vital. We simply cannot afford to have the industry operated in a non-sustainable way, even briefly. We are suffering a little right now, but what can be seen in twenty years if population continues to increase, continues to outstrip demand? Good models of what is likely to happen are the farming and the fishing industries. An environmentally insensitive person might excuse a bit of environmental damage to prop up jobs or economics, but currently we're in red ink in all facets related to sustainability. And still the demand for more mills and bigger mills continues: Grand Alberta, a suite of new competitors in Minnesota (who interestingly were encouraged by the pulp and paper consulting giant Jaako Poyry to move towards pulping aspen at roughly the same time as the Alberta government was encouraged to move in the same direction.
As is clearly the case in agriculture and fisheries, we can no longer plan forestry projects without considering what's happening to similar industries and markets globally. The only path to sustainability is clearly through some sort of global "Marshall Plan". As the world's biggest producer of forest products, it's up to Canada to take a reading role in such directions. The future of our grandchildren is at stake!
Dr. David Schindler is Killam Professor of Ecology, University of Alberta
